There is no number that is larger than a Googolplexianth within the realm of current mathematical understanding.
Explanatory question
A Googolplexianth is an unfathomably large number, consisting of a googolplex of zeros after the digit 1. In other words, a number that is a one followed by a googolplex of zeroes. It is difficult to imagine anything larger than this number, as it contains more zeroes than there are particles in the known universe. Therefore, within the realm of current mathematical understanding, there is no number that can be considered bigger than a Googolplexianth.
As the physicist Richard Feynman once famously said, “Nobody ever figured out what a Googolplex really was… it’s way larger than the number of fundamental particles we think are in the universe.” This statement puts into perspective just how immense this number truly is.
Interesting Facts:
- A googolplexianth is so large that writing it out in its entirety would be impossible, as it would take up more space than there are atoms in the observable universe.
- The term “googolplex” was first coined by a nine-year-old boy named Milton Sirotta in the 1940s.
- A googolplexianth is also known as a ten duotrigintillion.
- In theoretical physics, a googolplex is often used as an example of numbers that are too large to be physically meaningful.
Table:
| Number Name | Number of Zeros |
|---|---|
| Hundred | 2 |
| Thousand | 3 |
| Million | 6 |
| Billion | 9 |
| Trillion | 12 |
| Quadrillion | 15 |
| Quintillion | 18 |
| Googol | 100 |
| Googolplex | 10^100 |
| Googolplexianth | 10^10^100 |
Answer in video
The YouTube video “What’s the Biggest Number?” delves into the world of large numbers, explaining terms like million, billion, and trillion before introducing the googol and googolplex, enormous numbers that are almost impossible to conceptualize. The video concludes by revealing that there are an infinite number of numbers, and that no matter how large a number may seem, there will always be a larger one out there.
More answers to your inquiry
What’s bigger than a googolplex? Even though a googolplex is immense, Graham’s number and Skewes’ number are much larger. Named after mathematicians Ronald Graham and Stanley Skewes, both numbers are so large that they can’t be represented in the observable universe.
Yes, Graham’s number is much bigger than Googolplexian. Graham’s number is a number that is so large that it can not be written out with conventional mathematics. It has an unimaginably large number of digits, and researchers have even still not been able to give a precise answer to its size.
Graham’s number is bigger than the googolplex. It’s so big, the Universe does not contain enough stuff on which to write its digits: it’s literally too big to write. But this number is finite, it’s also an whole number, and despite it being so mind-bogglingly huge we know it is divisible by 3 and ends in a 7.
Graham’s Number is larger than a googolplexian, by a large, large, large, large margin. A googolplexian is one followed by a googolplex zeroes. A googolplex is one followed by a googol zeroes.
Graham’s number is bigger than the googolplex. It’s so big, the Universe does not contain enough stuff on which to write its digits: it’s literally too big to write. But this number is finite, it’s also an whole number, and despite it being so mind-bogglingly huge we know it is divisible by 3 and ends in a 7.
You will be interested
I am sure you will be interested in this
Moreover, Is a googolplexianth a smaller number?
I have never heard of a googolplexianth, but if it is a number then is a smaller number. PhD in Mathematics; Mathcircler. Upvoted by Is there any way for me to comprehend the size of Graham’s number?
Also question is, How big is the googolplexian?
The Googolplexian is a staggeringly huge number. It is however staggeringly small when you consider Graham’s number, or similar such numbers that are defined on the basis of exponential powers. Things get better (as in bigger ) if we take Googleplexian raised to its own power, and exponentially bigger if we repeat this exercise recursively.
Hereof, Is googolplexian smaller than a tower of exponents?
As a response to this: So, Googolplexian is much smaller than a tower of exponents of 3 3 ‘s of length 6 6, or in other words Googolplexian is less than 3 ↑↑ 6 3 ↑↑ 6. (using Knuth’s up-arrow notation .) Now, compare this with just the first layer of Graham’s number,i.e., 3 ↑↑↑↑ 3 3 ↑↑↑↑ 3.
Beside above, What is the difference between a googol and a googolplex?
Response: A Googol is defined as 10100 10 100. A Googolplex is defined as 10Googol 10 Googol. A Googolplexian is defined as 10Googolplex 10 Googolplex. Intuitively, it seems to me that Graham’s number is larger (maybe because of it’s complex definition). Can anybody prove this?
How much is a googolplexianth?
Response: How much is a googolplexianth? – Answers First, you need to know how much is googol.Googol is 10 with 100 more zeros. Googolplex is 10 with googol more zeros.
Just so, Is googolplexian smaller than a tower of exponents? Answer: So, Googolplexian is much smaller than a tower of exponents of 3 3 ‘s of length 6 6, or in other words Googolplexian is less than 3 ↑↑ 6 3 ↑↑ 6. (using Knuth’s up-arrow notation .) Now, compare this with just the first layer of Graham’s number,i.e., 3 ↑↑↑↑ 3 3 ↑↑↑↑ 3.
Hereof, How big is the googolplexian? Answer will be: The Googolplexian is a staggeringly huge number. It is however staggeringly small when you consider Graham’s number, or similar such numbers that are defined on the basis of exponential powers. Things get better (as in bigger ) if we take Googleplexian raised to its own power, and exponentially bigger if we repeat this exercise recursively.
One may also ask, What is the difference between googolplexian and googol?
Answer will be: Googolplexian is “ten to the power googolplex”, while googolplex is “ten to the power googol”, and googol is “ten to the power one hundred”. In other words, googol is 1 followed by a hundred zeroes, googolplex is 1 followed by a googol zeroes, and googolplexian is 1 followed by a googolplex of zeroes. Large? That’s nothing. Less than microscopic.